Template talk:Quest
Suggestion for non-case specific parameters It may be easier to ask someone else: Could the input parameters for this template be non-case specific and still link to the correct referenced page? Currently, for page titles with "a/A", "of/Of", etc, the template requires exactly following the page title which isn't as easy to use (as compared to wiki search). This same comment is duplicated in Template:Item. K!ZeRotalk 05:47, August 1, 2010 (UTC) : For items, I can do it, since there is a wiki convention on item names: each word capitalized. But for the same reasons, there should be no problem referencing the correct capitalization for an item page. For quests, it would be very difficult and would require extensive use of the expensive "ifexists" parse function to differentiate the correct version. Because of this, the template would have to be substituted rather than transcluded, and that would end the simplicity of these templates, which only exists to simplify (a little bit) the linking work. So in short, I would leave both the way they are now. Scarbrowtalk 21:24, August 11, 2010 (UTC) :: Okay, that's fine then. I didn't know we were capitalizing all item titles. Should this be done for quests also? Not that big a deal I guess; not too hard to double-check a quest page before editing the template call (just that wikia is slow for me). K!ZeRotalk 03:15, August 13, 2010 (UTC) ::: I've thought of it before, but since titles of quests are sometimes longer, that could look awkward. Also, we are using full capitalization on items because item capitazation in-game is not consistent, so there is no reference to use. For quests, we don't have that problem. A possibly useful advice: when I'm linking a quest, I usually just open the brackets and start writing, and wait for wikia's javascript to complete the title for me, so I know there's no mistake. Scarbrowtalk 17:39, August 16, 2010 (UTC) To replace, or not to replace Our Editors' Guide suggests using this Quest template to link to quests. But this template's own documentation says it's actually easier and preferred to use standard wiki markup to link to quests. It's unusual to see a template that deprecates itself. 8-) Problem is, there are currently 550 articles using this template! That is a ridiculous number to consider updating by hand. I know some of the editors here have used bots to do mass edits; is that something we should consider doing in the future to replace this template with the equivalent wiki markup? Or is the level of activity on this wiki too low to even bother with large projects any more? — Young Ned (talk) 00:14, November 30, 2016 (UTC) : I use the template if I don't want the Quest prefix to show up in front of a quest title in the text, gives for instance. Trying to do the same thing using wiki markup gives a broken link to Underfoot, I'd need to type Underfoot to make it work (Underfoot). So I think we should let the articles be and do something about the documentations instead. Memory King (talk) 21:03, November 30, 2016 (UTC) ::Well, you're using the wrong wiki markup -- you just need to do Quest:Underfoot to get what you want (Underfoot). Which is exactly what the template documentation says to use. But if you want to keep it because it's easier for you to remember than Quest:Underfoot, that's okay. 8-) — Young Ned (talk) 00:47, December 5, 2016 (UTC) ::: I had forgotten that trick, likely due to a combination of editing habits and me not encountering it recently in article codes. Probably should have read this template page before commenting instead of assuming that I no everything. The main reason why I find the other method easier to remember is its similarity to item linking, doing the same thing for both is a bit convenient. I see your point about the redundancy of the template though; I don't have any objections to the replacements, assuming that the bot uses the method you listed. I wouldn't have a problem with changing my coding since I wouldn't be increasing my typing like I thought initially. Memory King (talk) 03:05, December 5, 2016 (UTC)